Documentary: Half a Year of My Life (2005)

In Finland it is compulsory for every man to serve in the military. Here is a documentary film describing what happens if you decide not to do that service. The film is about ten years old. We recently added English subtitles to it.

http://vimeo.com/66967668

Message in the Bottle

There is a new collection of poems floating in the ocean of samsara titled 'Message in the Bottle'. The poems are writen by a buddhist monk while staying at forest monasteries in Australia. You can download the collection for free as a PDF file from here:

Message in the Bottle

Mind Creates the World

When I think of anarchy, I think of a way to relate to the world around me. Whether it be religion, politics or any other aspect of the external circumstances I find myself in. To me anarchy means the ability to think for oneself, rather that rely on others to think for me.

My understanding of Buddhist theory is, that the mind of an individual creates the world. If the mind ceases, the world ceases. This is also my understanding of actual reality based on my own observations. The first verse in Buddhist text called the Dhammapada says:

"Mind precedes created things; Mind’s their chief, from mind they spring. With tainted mind who speaks or acts, Pain trails that man like the wheel trails ox-tracks."

The Buddhist theory also states that everyone is responsible for their own actions. If you do something wrong, it is your fault. The same principle applies if you do something good, it is your merit.

Anarchistic approach to Buddhism is to see for oneself if these teachings hold true or not. If they turn out to be a bunch of lies, then off with Buddhism. According to the Pali Canon, the Buddha himself encouraged people to make up their own minds.

Another method an anarchist uses when studying Buddhism, is to actually practice what the Buddha said, and not just talk about what the Buddha said. You can talk about these teachings your entire life and never put them in any use. How on earth could you ever find out that way?

Open Sangha

We have a new Finnish discussion forum on Buddhism and other related subjects:

http://avoinsangha.fi/

The name 'avoin sangha' translates into English as 'open sangha'. The idea behind the forum was to give people an opportunity to discuss religion without constraints.

Black Mercy

"Viktor Belash noted that even in the worst time for the revolutionary army, namely at the beginning of 1920, "In the majority of cases rank-and-file Red Army soldiers were set free". Of course Belash, as a colleague of Makhno's, was likely to idealize the punishment policies of the Batko. However, the facts bear witness that Makhno really did release "in all four directions" captured Red Army soldiers. This is what happened at the beginning of February 1920, when the insurgents disarmed the 10,000-strong Estonian Division in Huliajpole."

A. Buysky, "The Red Army on the Internal Front", Gosizdat (1927), p. 52.

Saffron Robe

From 'The Broken Buddha' by Bhante Dhammika:

"There is no more unity between Theravadians in different countries than there is within them. The popular and outward expressions of Theravada in these lands are more pronounced than the similarities. Add to this the high degree of nationalism and ethnocentricity amongst Sri Lankans, Burmese and especially Thais and they only barely recognize each other as co-religionists. When King Chulalankhorn of Thailand visited the Shwedagon Pagoda in Burma in 1870 he marched right in with his shoes on. True, it was a Buddhist temple but it wasn’t one of ‘our temples’ so it didn’t really matter. The Burmese for their part were not too upset by the king’s behavior. After all, he was not Burmese so he hardly qualified to be a Buddhist. Western monks living in Asia are treated with the greatest courtesy and kindness but they are rarely accepted as real monks or real Buddhists. To a Burmese you have to be Burmese to be a ‘real’ Buddhist, Thais think the same way, the Sri Lankans somewhat less so. Phra Peter says; ‘It is a fact that a lot of Thai people don’t seem to take me very seriously as a monk and I have heard other Phra Farang say they have met with similar ‘resistance.’ Despite wearing the same robe, shaving my head and following the same rules as my Thai colleagues, I am still not a ‘real’ monk... When I have occasionally asked why I am not taken seriously, I am told; ‘You are not Thai and you do not chant’. I point out gently that the Buddha was not Thai either and as far as I know, he didn’t have a lot to say about the necessity or efficacy of chanting. It doesn’t make any difference.’ The situation is not dissimilar for Westerners going to temples in their own countries run by Thai monks or even by Western monks trained in Thailand. Long before they learn any Dhamma they find they have to adopt Thai etiquette, pronounce Pali with a Thai accent, sit in the Thai manner, bow in the Thai way; in short become a Thai clone. One gets the feeling that it would be more in keeping with their real attitude if the monks in such establishments wore Thai flags rather than yellow robes."

http://www.theravada-dhamma.org/pdf/Dhammika_Broken-Buddha.pdf

Red Bureaucracy

A Finnish translation from a interview with Noam Chomsky:

INTERVIEWER: A number of people have noted that you use the term 'libertarian socialist' in the same context as you use the word 'anarchism'. Do you see these terms as essentially similar? Is anarchism a type of socialism to you? The description has been used before that “anarchism is equivalent to socialism with freedom”. Would you agree with this basic equation?

CHOMSKY: The introduction to Guerin’s book that you mentioned opens with a quote from an anarchist sympathiser a century ago, who says that “anarchism has a broad back,” and “endures anything.” One major element has been what has traditionally been called 'libertarian socialism'.

I’ve tried to explain there and elsewhere what I mean by that, stressing that it’s hardly original; I’m taking the ideas from leading figures in the anarchist movement whom I quote, and who rather consistently describe themselves as socialists, while harshly condemning the 'new class' of radical intellectuals who seek to attain state power in the course of popular struggle and to become the vicious “Red bureaucracy” of which Bakunin warned; what’s often called 'socialism'.

I rather agree with Rudolf Rocker’s perception that these (quite central) tendencies in anarchism draw from the best of Enlightenment and classical liberal thought, well beyond what he described. In fact, as I’ve tried to show they contrast sharply with Marxist-Leninist doctrine and practice, the 'libertarian' doctrines that are fashionable in the US and UK particularly, and other contemporary ideologies, all of which seem to me to reduce to advocacy of one or another form of illegitimate authority, quite often real tyranny.

-----------------

HAASTATTELIA: Moni on huomannut, että sinä käytät termiä 'libertaristinen sosialismi' samassa yhteydessä kuin sanaa 'anarkismi'. Näetkö että nämä kaksi termiä ovat olennaisesti samankaltaisia? Onko anarkismi sinulle yksi sosialismin muoto? Määritelmää jonka mukaan 'anarkismi on yhtä kuin sosialismi vapauden kanssa' on käytetty. Oletko samaa mieltä tämän perusmääritelmän kanssa?

CHOMSKY: Tämä mainitsemasi johdatonto Guerin kirjaan alkaa sata vuotta vanhalla lainauksella, joka on peräisin eräältä anarkismiin myönteisesti suhtautuneelta henkilöltä. Hän sanoo 'anarkismilla on leveä selkä, se sietää mitä vaan'. Yksi keskeinen elementti siinä on ollut niin kutsuttu 'libertaristinen sosialismi'. Olen yrittänyt selittää tuossa johdannossa ja muualla, että mitä minä oikein tarkoitan tällä termillä, tähdentäen että se on kaikkea muuta kuin omaperäinen.

Minä lainaan ideani anarkistisen liikkeen johtohahmoilta. He johdonmukaisesti määrittävät itsensä sosialisteiksi. Samalla he kuitenkin jyrkästi toimitsevat 'uuden luokan' radikalistit, jotka pyrkivät valtion johtoon populaarin kamppailun avulla. He pyrkivät häikäilemättömäksi 'punaiseksi byrokratiaksi', josta Bakunin meitä varoitti. Tätä kutsutaan usein sosialismiksi.

Olen aikalailla samaa mieltä Rudolf Rockersin kanssa siitä, että nämä (melko keskeiset) anarkismin ominaisuudet ovat peräisin parhaasta osasta valistuksen aikaa ja klassista liberalistista ajattelua, mutta vielä paljon syvemmälti kuin mitä Rockers esitti.

Olen yrittänyt näyttää, että nämä ominaisuudet eroavat merkittävästi marxilais-leninistisestä perinteestä. Ne eroavat myös niistä 'libertaristisista' perinteistä, jotka ovat muodissa erityisesti jenkeissä ja Iso-Britanniassa. Sekä yleensä muista vastaavista tämän päivä ideologioista. Ne kaikki näyttävät minusta pelkistyvän jonkilaisen perusteettoman hallinnon, tai jopa tyrannian, suosimiseen.

http://struggle.ws/pdfs/rbr2.pdf